I have to say, I'm confused by the ban on gay marriages in CofE and CoW churches. Shouldn't this be left to the individual church or diocese to decide? Is there discretion already for marrying (or not) divorced people and non-believers?
I don't think there should be an imposition of marriages that are felt to be incompatible with the beliefs of the church upon said church but why ban it?
I think there is a real problem of language here. I have friends who sincerely believe that marriage is a Christian institution and so should be performed in accordance with its statutes. I understand the point of view, without sharing it, and I can even understand that the fact the head of state is also the governor of the CofE suggests that our laws should be broadly compatible with the Christian faith as well.
However, what is being legislated for is civil marriage. The concept of marriage predates Christianity, is common to all religions and has essentially always been a civil concept about property. I think there is an argument to say civil marriage and religious marriage are two concepts which have less in common than perhaps the vocabulary suggests.
Another test may present itself when polyamorous groups ask why they also cannot enjoy the rights - and rites - of marriage. I think we may find that the difference between two and three is far harder to accommodate (on a practical, not emotional) level than man-man and woman-woman.
Personally I still don't understand how people can argue that their faith prohibits this, based on a literal reading of some words in the Bible, whilst rejecting the need to literally interpret others. Leaving aside the question of whether faith itself is logical, this is not a logical argument.